9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 435 - AT - Central ExciseWaiver of Pre-deposit of Duty u/s 11A (1) Held that - The appellant has deposited an amount which is more than 8% of the total liability - the deposit is enough to hear and dispose the appeals, relying upon the various orders of this Bench - Applications for the waiver of pre-deposit of balance amounts involved are allowed and recovery stayed till the disposal of appeals Sat granted.
Issues involved: Stay petitions for waiver of pre-deposit of duty confirmed under Section 11A (1) of Central Excise Act, 1944, short payment of duty, interest, and penalty on the main appellant and penalties on directors.
Analysis: The judgment delivered by Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. H.K. Thakur, JJ., pertains to three stay petitions filed by the main appellant, M/s. Oracle Granito Ltd., seeking the waiver of pre-deposit of a duty amount confirmed under Section 11A (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, along with interest and penalty. The confirmed demand of duty on the main appellant was Rs.6,40,79,539, out of which they had already deposited Rs.1,60,00,000 during the investigation phase. The appellant's counsel argued that the amount paid constituted approximately 30% of the duty confirmed by lower authorities. The counsel referred to a directive from the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, which mandated the deposit of 8% of the total confirmed duty amount. The counsel presented a copy of a similar order by the Bench to support their argument. Upon reviewing the records and hearing both parties, the judges found that the appellant had already deposited an amount exceeding 8% of the total liability. Relying on previous orders of the Bench in similar cases, the judges deemed the deposit sufficient to proceed with hearing the appeals. Consequently, the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of the remaining balance amounts were allowed, and the recovery of those amounts was stayed until the appeals were disposed of. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in the court, granting relief to the appellant based on the deposit made and the precedents set by the Bench in similar cases.
|
